Shaw66

I actually played in one of those charity games, at D'Youville in 1967 or 68. I remember practically nothing from that game. A few years later I played in one against Redskins players. I remember that one because I was run over by an offensive lineman going after loose ball. Where are the old gates? I'd like to see them.

Obviously not the rugby guy. You're good at being snarky without trying. Yes, we all hope they can play at this level. But I think this season is different. For me, at least, in most seasons I think the 4th and 5th round picks, and beyond, are guys who probably will need a season or more before they become useful. Harrison Phillips is a good example. I hoped he'd develop, but I didn't expect much from him as a rookie. Shakier is another. It's a surprise to me when one of those guys plays early. But Van Pran-Granger is different. I'm not just hoping he'll start. He has credentials and play on film that suggests he can start soon. I don't think that because the Bills have a hole to fill - they don't have a hole. Left guard and center are manned by veterans who have shown they can play in the league. I think he could start because I looks like an usual talent to get in the fifth round. Is that true? I don't know; as I said earlier, there are reasons he dropped to the fifth round, and I don't know what those reasons are. As I've said, the whole draft looks unusual to me in that way. Solomon is another example. I don't think Solomon will be a star in the league; I think that because of his size, the league will get a book on him and take advantage of his size. However, while the league is trying to figure him out, I think the Bills may very well get valuable snaps out of him this year. Valuable snaps from a fifth-round edge rusher is unusual. The draft just looks different to me this year, and it is not because I think the Bills have holes. I don't think they have holes; we'd all like to see them stronger at some positions, but they don't have holes.

I didn't know these lawsuits were pending. Silly me. This will change college sports forever. It will suck the profit out of lots of programs, and without the profits, the programs will struggle. Just to get some sense of what this will mean: Imagine if Josh Allen, after his breakout season at Wyoming, could have "entered the portal" (in other words, become a free agent). Some school like Alabama or Southern Cal would have offered him a couple million dollars to transfer.

It's precisely because it's a complex position that it's not uncommon for centers to start early in the NFL. Mitch Morse stated as a rookie, and he wasn't and isn't the toughest or strongest guy. He started because smart guys who have played the position at a high level in college come into the league pretty far up the learning curve. Tackles, on the other hand, haven't been prepared in college to play NFL tackle. It's not a stretch to think he could start early, especially if Edwards underperforms at left guard. Remember, a lot of people here, correctly, said that moving McGregor potentially made the Bills weaker at two positions, even though they lost only one starter. If VPG can play, the Bills again are potentially weaker at only one position, and maybe not by much or for long.

My point was that they all are guys who've given good indication that they could play early. I won't be surprised if any of them is starting by mid-season, because they've all demonstrated some important characteristics. As someone said, VPG is a two-time all SEC guy, two-time national champion - I'm not going to be surprised if he starts. But he won't start out desperation on the Bills part - they will be fine with McGregor. Bishop is a highly rated guy, exactly in the mold of McDermott safeties, so I won't be surprised. But the Bills have two NFL veteran safeties, and Bishop won't start unless he's good enough. And Coleman, also highly rated, with a pretty interesting skill set. I won't be surprised. But no one will hand him the starting job. He has to beat out three or four credibly NFL veterans - Shakir, Samuel, MVS, and Claypool. So, no, I'm not saying they're locks. I'm saying they have something about them, each of them, that suggests they could play early.

Absolutely. My point was that it seems that NO GM, including Beane, had a third round grade on him. There must reasons why NO GM took him in the third or fourth rounds, and I doubt every GM's reason was lack of positional flexibility. So, that means he has some limitations that at least some GMs saw, including Beane. That makes me think that I'm being overly optimistic to think he's a rookie starter. We'll see.

Yes. In other words, you can be effective, maybe even more effective, without a classic #1. I've read that somewhere before. ☺️

Yes, that's correct. Coleman is a replacement, Bishop is a replacement, Van Pran-Granger is a replacement. But the interesting thing about is that the replacements look like they can play now, not spend three years working their way into the league. If Coleman starts, it will be because he can do the job, not because there was no one else. Bishop too. And VPG. They each have to take the job from veteran players who have real NFL starting experience, but what's interesting is that they no one will be surprised to if they win the jobs. For example, the Bills are not going to start VPG just because they project him as the center of the future. He'll start if he can do the job, and absent injury, only if he can do the job. McGregor won't be a failure at center - he might not be great, but he won't fail. As I said, what's amazing about this draft is how many rookies can legitimately win significant playing time. And, by the way, the fact that they have a fifth-rounder who may start on a Super Bowl contender is one of the core concepts McDermott explained when he first got here. He said the roster would improve every year, and he said he would build a culture where the veterans bring the young players up to speed quickly, so that you can get help out of the draft quickly. It's easier to put VPG into the starting lineup with Torrence and McGregor next to him than with whoever the guards were five years ago. If he has talent, the veterans will see it quickly, and they will work to integrate him. Same with Coleman, and Bishop (man, I wish they'd get Micah back on the field as a player or a coach, just to talk to Bishop every day). This is a championship caliber team, and young talent fits in more quickly than on a team that's perennially .500 or worse.

This is exactly what I think, and I'm regularly amazed that fans are so perplexed by moves McBeane make. They don't do haphazard. They don't do spur of the moment. They don't do wild-ass guess. They study and think and plan, then challenge everyone in the organization to execute. For example, I think it's pretty impressive how they've built an offensive line. Pretty much everyone here, including me, complained regularly about the oline five years ago. I was watching one of the Josh career-highlight videos, and over and over again on the backs of offensive linemen I saw names I didn't even remember. I think a very good argument can be made that the roster has improved every season, including the wide receiver roster this season. And if my Aiyuk pipedream becomes reality, there will be no question.

Well, I haven't watched film or studied him, and I wouldn't know what to make of it if I did watch film, but I've been optimistic about him, too, since the day the Bills took him. All of what you say is what I've thought, especially the stuff about his college pedigree. There's little question that guys with good experience in elite programs like Alabama and Georgia can play, and play early, in the NFL. It was true to a lesser extent during Clemson's run, too. On the other hand, as an abstract matter, no one thinks a fifth round rookie interior lineman to be a day one starter. If the only reason he fell to day three is that he has no position flexibility, well, then I'd say some GMs aren't thinking about their team well enough. Of course Beane, who needed an interior lineman, took a rotational DT in the third round instead of VPG, so he must have some questions about VPG, too. It continues to amaze me that with almost every pick Beane got a player who has a seriously good chance of playing more than token snaps in his rookie season.

This makes a lot of sense. I think the Bills are happy where they are right now, and they want to see how all the questions get answered. What questions? Will Shakir be more productive? Will Kincaid be more productive? Will Samuel be more productive? Will Coleman pay early dividends? Will MVS be at least as good as he has been over his career? Will Claypool resurrect himself? If enough of those questions get answered positively, the Bills won't need help. But if there aren't enough positive answers, Beane will be shopping. I've been one to suggest that there might be a post-June 1 trade with the 49ers, but one of the problems with that from the 49ers' point of view is they lose a talent for the entire season and they don't get anything in return until the 2025 draft. Also, they don't know yet how their rookies are fitting in. If it's a mid-season, trade deadline deal, that's better for them. If their rookie is productive, they know they can afford to lose one of their stars, and the 2025 draft is that much closer. I think there's going to be a lot of excitement in Highmark this fall. The first time Coleman catches the ball with running room, it's going to be fun. And Samuel too. I actually think that Coleman, Samuel, Shakir, MVS (or Claypool) will be better than Diggs, Davis, Shakir.

Yes, there are plenty of things that could change. The fumble into the end zone and out of bounds. The automatic first downs against the defense. But I think they've done some good things. They actually did a good job cleaning up the what's a catch mess. There are very few plays no where it feels like some team get hosed big-time on that rule. If I could do one thing, I'd have instant booth reviews on almost everything. I'd have an official in a press box with access to all the video and with a direct line into the headsets of officials on the field. In basketball, there are plenty of missed calls, but for most of the game, they are inconsequential. It's only two points, they tend to even out, etc. But in football, a missed called easily can be one of the most important plays in the game. A missed call easily can change the outcome of the game. College football already has shown that you can make such a system work. Instant booth reviews are the one thing that could be done to reduce the officials being the reason a game ended the way it did. If there were booth reviews, then the coaches' challenges would be less important. If they don't go to booth reviews of everything, then I've always thought the limits on coaches' challenges. Every time a coach is correct on a challenge, the coach should get another challenge. The idea of limiting the number of challenges was so that the game isn't unnecessarily prolonged by reviews. However, if a coach challenges a call and is correct, why shouldn't he get another? After all, all he's done is fix an official's mistake, and everyone should be in favor of that.

McDermott has talked about this. He wants to attack vertically and horizontally. He wants to spread the defense over the greatest possible area to create the biggest possible spaces to attack. Not all that novel an idea, but some coaches are more dedicated to the concept than others. It's going to be fun.

I yhink it comes down to OC and QB.

Are you coming around, perhaps, to having a receiver room with a true field-stretcher? Don't like, but can see what they're trying to do?

I've never really understood blitzing strategy - when is the right time to blitz. Contrary, in part, to what you said, it was a common tactic around the league to blitz on third or fourth and five with the game on the line - late, close score, opponent in the red zone. DC doesn't care at all that the other team knows he's bringing 6; all he knows is he wants to force the ball out of the QB's hands. Against the Bills and the Chiefs, that's absolutely the right strategy - get the ball out of the QB's hands, because ultimately he's the guy who's going to hurt you. But for other times in the game, I agree with you. McDermott seems to blitz when he's unhappy about the pass rush he's getting. Now, in a sense, I get it. You need pass rush, and if you aren't getting any other way then, well, I guess you need to blitz. But the whole point of his defensive philosophy, the basis of it all, is that he'll get pressure with four, with seven deep protecting all the passing territory. If he gets the right players, trains them well, and makes good defensive calls, the blitz shouldn't be necessary. If you're doing it right, the blitz is simply a tactic that when called at the right times can get you a big negative play.

Your entire post is excellent. I want to add one more thing to your discussion of the passing game: Run after catch. It is one more reason the receiver room looks like it does. Samuel, Shakir, Coleman, plus Kincaid and Cook. Yes, give Allen good passing lanes, but also complete passes in space for these guys to run. It is what the good, complex passing offenses in the NFL do. Bills look like they want to get on the bandwagon. Done right, Allen's air yards go down and his yards per completion go up.

Good stuff. And remember, I think the consensus around here has been that Valdez-Scantling is the one who's more likely to be a factor. So, if Claypool doesn't pan out (he's still a longshot), MVS isn't a bad alternative. So long as Coleman emerges as a real threat, it's likely that someone will step up as the complementary piece. It's looking like an interesting collection of receivers.

Yeah, I commented about Coleman but you're right, it was all of them. Playing against air, but every catch seemed to be hands. However, if you think about the plays that we've seen, there weren't any deep balls with guys making arm catches. There weren't any deep balls that I can recall. It might be a sign of what's to come, but mostly I think it was a day to work out kinks and practice some basics.

AVP was thick.

Those videos of course don't show any drops by Coleman, but it's pretty clear the guy is a hands catcher. Catches it like Kincaid.

Excuse me, but receivers are a dime a dozen. Just look at that list of near Pro Bowlers.

I agree that this was intentional on McDermott's part. However, people shouldn't infer from that that Claypool isn't doing a good job. McDermott meant what he said. McDermott wouldn't make it up just to motivate the guy.

Absolutely correct. If Edmunds hadn't been on the squad, Bernard might have gotten a lot of first-team reps in training camp, and who knows. On the other hand, when he did get in the game as a rookie, he didn't look anything like the player we saw the next season.

It's one of the rare cases where a player didn't know the rule, and the officials gave him a pass. Knowing the rules is part of the game. It was the same game, right?, when Dawkins or someone got called for that block ten yards behind the play. One player got the sympathy of the refs, the other didn't, and the outcome of the game was changed.